Yes, there were 13 seasons, but a team that joined in season 14 for example would not be able to get to the top league by season 17, so you're already arguing from a flawed base with that. So what you're really saying is that no team from seasons 5-13 were not in the top division by season 17 (though I suppose, in theory, you could have seen teams in season 14 placed in IV). And going straight from V-IV-III-II-I is practically an unreasonable expectation as well; a fairly ambitious projection would be a team promoting every two seasons -- meaning a team joining later than season 9 could not reasonably expect to make it to the top (they'd spend 9-10 in V, 11-12 in IV, 13-14 in III, 15-16 in II and promote for season 17). Suddenly your 13 seasons are reduced to five, and even that group requires very optimistic appraisals of how long it takes to promote.
Even when you are trying to reduce it with a logic with no base, you still get 25% of BB-community with only teams from the first four division and not the other later five (you narrowed down into) at those first divisions.
Although much less important, why did you decided that two seasons is the number?
Does a good BB-manager should have trouble on the lowest divisions?
I mean, when neglecting the current state where what is main importance for promoting is not the quality of the BB-manager but the date he joined...
So basically, once again, you didn't explained that.
And if the new user is no better a manager than the old user, there is no reason at all that it is a problem for him to never pass the other.
No one said differently.
But what you didn't answer again is the other case that currently exists.
Two users, with the same BB-managing qualities, that had joined at two different seasons, will never be able to compete, and the one who had joined first will forever be before the later one.
But can you point to one of these "worse" managers who succeeds in spite of a "better" manager, who you may also identify? If this is such a problem in the game environment, surely you must have plenty of documented examples to illustrate the problem
For doing that, we will need to go over each desicion one have made and give a score for that.
This is not practical.
You are trying an arguement that is equal to the question "prove that you don't have a sister".
No matter what you will say about that, you couldn't prove it wrong.
What can be asked, and still haven't been explained is how does the cases I've brought, about Spain, Italy, France and Germany [More than 25% of the BB-community], can happen if the system is OK, and there is no competitiveness problem on this game who gives older teams an misfair advantage.